Maximum PC performance RSS Feed

Intel Introduces Tools to Optimize 34nm SSD Performance in Windows 7

Pulkit Chandna — Mon, 26 Oct 2009 17:44:13 -0500

Intel today announced the availability of a couple of new tools and a new firmware for its 34nm X25-M SATA SSDs. The Intel SSD Optimizer and the new firmware, both of which leverage the Windows* 7 ATA Data Set Management Command (known as Trim), are designed to preserve the out-of-box performance of Intel SSDs, while the Intel Solid-State Drive (SSD) Toolbox contains applications to better monitor the health of SSDs.

According to Intel, the Trim attribute of the ATA Data Set Management Command "synchs the operating system's view of deleted files with those that are deleted, but not erased on the drive."

Trim helps the SSD identify unused blocks of data, thereby lending stability to the health and performance of the SSD. Intel said in the press release that 34nm X25-M 160GB owners can expect an improvement of around 40 percent in sequenstial write speeds with the firmware update, which amounts to write speeds of up to 100MB per second.

"Not only will Windows 7 users receive the performance enhancements of the Trim command, but so will our Windows XP and Vista users," said Pete Hazen, director of marketing, Intel NAND Solutions Group.

Image Credit: Intel

Chrome is 30 Percent Faster, Better, Stronger

Paul Lilly — Tue, 11 Aug 2009 08:30:50 -0500

With the recent focus on JavaScript performance, browser makers continue to claim huge performance gains with each new release, and that trend continues in the latest beta release of Google Chrome, version 3.0.195.6.

How much faster? According to Google, tweaks made to the engine have resulted in a 30 percent performance boost over the current stable version, at least when running the V8 and SunSpider benchmarks. But speed isn't the only improvement.

"We've also improved two of the most loved and most used features of Google Chrome: the New Tab page and the Omnibox. Plus, we decided to add a little bit of style by allowing you to deck out your browser with colors, patterns, and images," Google wrote in a blog entry.

Google also said it has started building HTML5 capabilities into the latest beta release, including video tag functionality and web workers. This is the first version of Chrome to do so.

Anyone interested in giving the beta a spin can start right here.

Murphy's Law: Is a Firefox 3.5 Really That Fast?

David Murphy — Wed, 01 Jul 2009 12:45:58 -0500

Happy day-after-Firefox-release day. If you're one of the 3.2 million Americans to download the latest release of the browser as of this column's writing, congratulations. You, like your peers, have recognized the value of upgrading to faster and better technology products! If that sounds weird, that's the point. It should. According to Net Applications, around twenty percent of users (out of a survey sample of around 160 million people) still use an older version of a Web browser, be it Internet Explorer 6, Firefox 2, or either Safari 3.1 or 3.2. You are not among them; I salute thee.

You've probably read a lot of marketing in the last 24 hours about how fast, awesome, and packed-full of features the new Firefox 3.5 release is. Since you've had a chance to play with the release candidate of this latest upgrade starting in early June, this shouldn't come as much of a surprise. But let's cut through the press release and examine the real facts: Just how much faster is Firefox 3.5 over its browser brethren? Has Mozilla's newest TraceMonkey JavaScript engine delivered a princess or a barrel?

Yes and no.

If we're just considering a Firefox-only universe then, yes, the browser's performance is quite an improvement over its predecessor 3.0.11 release. You can partially thank Adobe for that. Mozilla interwove the company's just-in-time compiler nanojit, released as open-source in 2006, alongside a new tracing system to create Firefox's new JavaScript engine. Without getting too technical, the tracing engine streamlines Firefox's operations by recording the path that frequently accessed JavaScript code takes through an interpreter. It then compiles this trace into native code, which can be called up and duplicated faster than passing the code through the interpreter once again.

The industry-standard SunSpider JavaScript benchmark attempts to highlight differences in browser performance by running through a series of real-world use patterns. More than that, the program runs through enough iterations of the tests to calculate a measurement of the run's statistical significance--a determination of the accuracy of your results and their validity for real-world comparisons. Using this very benchmark, Harry McCracken of Technologizer notes that Firefox 3.5 delivers a performance improvement that's 2.4 times faster than Firefox 3.0.11. But Google's Chrome 2.0 beta takes the cyber-cake in the end, just squeaking by Mozilla's masterpiece on the benchmark charts.

(+1) Google Chrome

Samara Lynn from ChannelWeb ran her own SunSpider browser evaluation, sticking to Google Chrome, Firefox 3.5, and Internet Explorer 8. Her numbers gave Chrome an advantage of nearly 600 milliseconds, or a 39 percent decrease in time from Firefox 3.5 to Chrome. Internet Explorer 8 sank to the bottom of the listing as if it had a rock tied around its status bar, delivering a time of 8,131.8 milliseconds to Chrome's 924.2 (lower is better).

So who's right? Lynn? McCracken? TGDaily, which puts Chrome's time at 628.4 milliseconds (a 48 percent decrease compared to Firefox 3.5)? Nobody and everybody. While the rankings between the browsers remain the same within these three sites, as well as my own personal comparisons of Firefox and Chrome in SunSpider, the numbers vary depending on the system setup. That makes it a little difficult to decide the close races, especially since TGDaily has Chrome beating out Safari by roughly 60 milliseconds. At least we can all agree that Chrome is faster than Firefox 3.5, right?

(+1) Google Chrome

A similar situation occurs on Futuremark's Peacekeeper browser benchmark. Although TGDaily claims that Chrome won't run it, both Lynn and I received scores when running the program through Google's browser. She has Chrome beating out Firefox 3.5 by a score of 2747 to 1843, a 49 percent speed increase from Firefox 3.5 to Chrome. I found a 55 percent increase in performance on my own benchmark run, with Chrome overtaking Firefox 3.5 to the tune of 3,073 to 1,978. Just for the sake of a good joke, Lynn pegs Internet Explorer's performance on this test at a whopping 675. That's not even half of her recorded score for Firefox.

(+1) Google Chrome

Just to throw one more benchmark in for good measure--because I don't exactly trust Google's Chrome V8 benchmark that suggests Chrome is nine times faster than Firefox 3.5--TG Daily ran one of my favorite evaluations that tests Flash performance in a browser. The run, called Le Crabe, measures how many individual animations your screen can hold before the frames-per-second score dips below a particular amount (25). On this, Firefox 3.5 crushed the competition, holding out for 636 total crabs on TG Daily's setup to Google Chrome's 241. Stranger still, even Internet Explorer itself pulled out of dead last to deliver an impressive second-place performance amongst Firefox 3.5, Safari, and Chrome.

(+1) Firefox 3.5

You made it this far--so which browser is faster? Eh. To really get a sense of how your browser performs, you have to factor in more than just the JavaScript benchmark numbers. What's the memory use of the browser? What kind of content exists on the sites are you hitting up? What's your Internet connection? While these benchmarking tools have allows us to legitimize the differences between Firefox's versions on a functional level, and help highlight the various browsers' abilities in certain areas of rendering, there's no clear-cut winner based on the numbers. After all, it's difficult to weigh certain performance aspects over others. And as you've seen, individual performance characteristics can vary greatly depending on the testing platform. Browser benchmarks are great for comparing version performance--for a big-picture guide, there's just so much more to consider.

Speed up your geek involvement by befriending David Murphy @acererak. He's three-point-five times as fast a twitterer as any other geek, save perhaps Nathan.

Facebook VP Says Intel, AMD Don't Deliver Promised Performance Increase

Pulkit Chandna — Tue, 30 Jun 2009 17:29:53 -0500

Jonathan Heiliger, vp of technical operations at Facebook, came down heavily on chip manufacturers Intel, AMD for making tall claims about server chips that eventually don’t live up to the hype. He was speaking at the Structure 09 conference in San Francisco.

"The performance gains they are touting in the press, we are not seeing in our applications. We are literally in real-time trying to figure out why that is and if there are optimizations that we can do. Otherwise, we are kind of left with current-generation technology and current-generation scale," he said during a Q&A session involving GigaOM’s founder Om Malik.

He said companies like Facebook and Amazon require their servers to be both power-efficient and affordable. Heiliger also commended Google for its server-designing prowess.

Image Credit: Darren Mckeeman (Flickr)

Maximum Mouse: Five Freeware Finger Apps That Rock

David Murphy — Tue, 21 Apr 2009 11:00:00 -0500

You've tweaked everything else on your PC, so how about your mouse? That's right. The trusty input device that sits to the side of your keyboard needs some love too, but how many of you have thought to install applications that benefit the common features you use your mouse for? Eh? I must admit, I never considered much to tweak about the mouse's functionality. You scroll the cursor to what you want to check out and give it a click. It's a two-step process. Rinse, wash, repeat. What else could you possibly do with a mouse?

Spoiler: a lot.

I've found five amazing freeware and open-source applications that help you turbo-charge your ability to interact with your PC. Give these a whirl, and you'll increase your productivity, reduce your stress, and be just that much cooler than your peers who are stuck in the Stone Age of mouse operations.

StrokeIt

What it does: This powerful, freeware application adds mouse gesture functionality to any application you want. What's that? Install the program and hold down your right mouse button. Then use the cursor to draw a predefined shape of your choosing. StrokeIt will recognize the picture or shape and carry out the assigned task. For example, you can use the program to create macros that output certain phrases or words, or even launch functions within an application. StrokeIt is a powerful tool that's only limited by your imagination and/or drawing capability--but don't worry, you don't have to be a Picasso to be productive.

Download it here!

NoClose

What it does: Have you ever been working so hard in an application, the mouse flying back and forth, that you accidentally tapped a certain "x"-shaped icon in the application's corner? It happens more often than you might think. But for whatever reason--your clumsiness, your desire to keep others from closing certain windows on your PC, or your need to battle your house cat for control of your desktop--NoClose is the solution to the premature death of your programs. Enable the program using a simple hotkey combination and the close icon in the upper-right corner of the current window will gray out. No amount of furious clicking will close this window, not unless you tap the specific hotkey once again.

Download it here!

Magic Formation

What it does: Magic Formation takes the concept of a "handy application launcher" to an entirely new level. Draw a circle with your mouse to activate the Magic Formation: a series of icons, arranged in a circle, which correspond to applications you've selected to include. From there, clicking on the specific icon launches the app. It's as easy as that. I like the design of this application because it completely conceals the application launching menu until you need it. Unlike similar programs that attempt to recreate the best of OSX's menu bar, you don't accidentally fire off the Magic Formation if you move your mouse over a particular corner of your screen.

Download it here!

Kid-Key-Lock

What it does: Tired of people (including children and pets) screwing with your computer when you're not in the room? It doesn't have to be on purpose -- in fact, cats are known for their ability to somehow shut down your PC just by walking across the keyboard and swishing their tails at the mouse. Trust me. Prevent this untimely event from occurring with Kid-Key-Lock, an awesome program that allows you to disable your keys and mouse buttons in a piecemeal fashion. It's nice to be able to block off certain buttons without disabling your entire keyboard or mouse. And even if you don't have any little creatures running around to touch your input devices in all sorts of annoying ways, you could always use this application to really hack off your co-workers...

Download it here!

Wizmouse

What it does: This application serves but one purpose: It allows you to use your mouse wheel to scroll windows that aren't the current, in-focus window. Sound silly? It's actually a huge timesaver. Suppose you want to stack your windows side-by-side and look through both of their contents? Because of Wizmouse, this process becomes seamless and fluid. It's a far more natural way of interacting with your desktop than the constant barrage of clicks that you're normally used to.

Download it here!

Nvidia Readying Ion Platform for Via CPUs

Pulkit Chandna — Mon, 23 Feb 2009 16:11:44 -0600

Nvidia showcased its bantam Ion platform during CES 2009. The Ion platform basically combines Intel’s Atom CPU with the GeForce 9400M GPU. Ion-toting netbooks are expected to be head and shoulders above today’s netbooks - that make a meal of even the simplest graphical tasks - in terms of graphics.

Nvidia has reached an agreement with Via to develop a new version of the Ion platform, which will feature Via’s Nano processor instead of the Intel Atom. Jen-Hsun Huang, Nvidia’s president and CEO, told Taiwanese website Digitimes that development of the Nano-based Ion platform has already commenced.

Image Credit: Pureoverclock

Gmail Tells IE Users to Switch - For Their Own Good?

Mark Edward Soper — Fri, 02 Jan 2009 11:28:14 -0600

TG Daily reports that Google's Gmail is now recommending that IE6 users switch to Chrome or Firefox 3. IE6 users logging into Gmail see a link that says "Get faster Gmail" that takes them to a "Get faster Google Mail with a faster browser" page that provides links to download IE7, Firefox 3, or Google Chrome.

Interestingly enough, if you use IE7, the page recommends upgrading to Firefox 3 or Google Chrome, as well as offering a link to the IE 8 beta.

So, what's up with Gmail and IE6? And, why is IE7 also on the naughty list? Is it really speed, or is it time to play "follow the money?"

What makes Google's anti-IE6 stance even stranger is that back in September, Google upgraded Gmail to give IE6 users (many of whom are corporate users that must use IE6) comparable features to those available to newer browsers. And, contrary to TG Daily's claim that IE6 is no longer a fully supported browser for Gmail, the "Does Google Mail support my browser" help page still lists IE versions 5.5 and above as fully supported.

The most likely answer for Google's pushing browsers other than IE is simple: its own Chrome web browser. Chrome is noted for its speed, and Google, quite understandably, wants to see Chrome's market share increase. To this end, Google recently replaced Firefox in its Google Pack, and hopes to sign up hardware OEMs to bundle Chrome on new PCs after Chrome emerges from beta early this year.

So, how about it, Gmail users? If you've tried different browsers with Gmail, do you see big improvements in performance when you use Chrome or Firefox versus IE6 or IE7? Is Google really trying to improve your Gmail experience, or just looking for an excuse to get more Chrome users? Hit Comment and tell us what you think.

Windows Vista 64-Bit – Is It Ready For Primetime?

Justin Kerr — Sat, 09 Aug 2008 17:01:53 -0500

When Windows Vista launched back in January 2007, the 64-bit edition was clearly not ready for primetime. The driver and compatibility issues that mired the early days of the OS were even worse on the 64-bit side, and for most users Vista x64 was completely crippled or in some cases, wouldn’t install at all. Hardware manufacturers struggled to release stable device drivers but because 32-bit and 64-bit editions both required radically different drivers, Vista x64 just wasn’t a priority. Coming up on two years later, 32-bit Vista’s issues seem to have calmed down, but what about Vista x64? Well according to Microsoft, usage of the niche OS is on the rise, but is it finally ready for prime time?

What is Vista 64, and why would I want this?

The jump from 16 to 32-bit computing in Windows 95 went mostly un-protested. But then again, back in 1995, computer instability was pretty much expected. PC pioneers put up with a lot of driver issues, and punishing blue screens. Today, PC operating systems have a much larger audience to impress, and most of its users have a very low tolerance for instability. For mainstream users, and those with older hardware, 32-bit is still the way to go. But chances are if you are reading this article, it’s because your not mainstream, and your ready to risk a few orphaned devices in pursuit of something better.

The obvious reason for transitioning to a 64-bit OS is the increased RAM capacity which technically could be as high as 16 Exabyte’s. Vista x64 however, only supports 8 GB for home premium, and a not too shabby 128 GB in the ultimate and business editions. And while this might sound a bit extreme, this extra RAM actually comes in quite handy even today. Microsoft claims Vista can make use the increased RAM capacity using a new feature called Superfetch. Using this technology, the OS is able to pre-load commonly used applications into memory, and even makes use of historical access patterns to predict a user’s needs. The more RAM present in the system, the more applications Vista can prefetch. This is an excellent example of how extra RAM can improve performance, but won’t necessarily show up in traditional benchmarks. This feature alone represents a huge benefit for heavy multi taskers looking for ways to improve overall system responsiveness.

Vista 64 Bit Software Compatibility

One of the most common myths about 64 bit operating systems is that old software doesn’t work. What you lose in stepping up a 64-bit OS is in fact, only 16-bit program support. This includes items from the DOS / Windows 3.1 era, but not much else. 64-Bit copies of Windows implement a technology called WOW64 (Windows-on-Windows) to enable backward compatibility with 32-bit applications that been emerging since the mainstream adoption of Windows 95 more then a decade ago. WOW64 creates a 32-bit environment that allows older applications to run unmodified in a 64-bit OS. Backwards compatibility with 8 & 16-bit applications isn’t impossible under Vista 64, but it requires a bit of creativity. An excellent choice for working with very old applications is Microsoft’s free Virtual PC 2007. This utility allows you to install a virtual copy of any Microsoft operating system including Windows 95, 98, or even MSDOS. You can then run it in parallel just like any other application.

To make life even simpler, If DOS compatibility is your only concern, DOSBox is an excellent free 32-bit alternative that will have you chasing Vorticons as Commander Keen in no time flat. Here is another important tip for 64-bit gamers. The Games for Windows brand might not add up to a lot, but for x64 users it signifies that the game was tested for compatibility in both 32 & 64-bit environments. Some games even ship with a native 64-bit executable, such as Crysis, and Devil May Cry 4 which in my case, greatly improved CPU efficiency. Many popular mainstream applications have gone 64-bit as well including, Adobe Lightroom, ESET NOD 32, and even Apple iTunes. Veteran Photoshop users can also look forward to 64-bit version that will substantially benefit from the additional RAM capacity.

Vista 64 Bit Hardware Compatibility

Working around software incompatibilities can be challenging, but at least workarounds exist for almost any scenario. Drivers on the other hand are a different story. 32-bit drivers are not compatible at all, and for the most part security improvements which will be detailed in the next section are to blame. While it safe to assume in advance that your 10 year old parallel port scanner won’t work, how will you know if your 2 year old USB printer is compatible? For that Microsoft has launched the Vista Compatibility Center. Simply browse the categories, click the 64-bit system filter and learn what hardware is, and is not compatible before you take the plunge.

Here is another Microsoft specific tip. When seeking out new hardware look for the “Works with Windows Vista” or “Certified for Windows Vista” logo’s. Hardware devices baring these badges have undergone testing in both 32 & 64-bit OS’s. Only a small number of devices bother to file for this certification however, so in most cases the Compatibility Center or the manufacturers website will be your best bet. Drivers have come a long way in the past year and I have yet to run into a device I couldn’t get working, though I must admit, I don’t tend to keep hardware for more the a few years. Nvidia, ATI, and even Creative Labs all have mature and stable x64 drivers at this point as well.

Vista 64 Bit Security Improvements

Oddly enough, one of the biggest improvements in Vista x64 bit is actually the enhanced security features that go far beyond what is offered by Vista 32. Microsoft has been able to utilize the lesser used 64-bit editions as a way of putting software developers on notice. They are attempting to encourage less destructive software/operating system interactions. Initiatives such as Kernel Patch Protection were implemented to help keep the Windows core operating system safe from threats that come from both Malware, and sloppy applications that like to plant their roots deep in the OS. It prevents kernel-mode drivers and 3^rd party software from interfering with critical Windows services, a defiantly plus. Sadly, this feature is no longer enforced post SP1, but many developers were forced to find workarounds during the delay and Microsoft isn’t making it easy.

Additionally, new security features such as Address Space Layout Randomizer and Data Execution Protection both help thwart hacking attempts to which 32-bit OS’s are still somewhat vulnerable. Other stipulations such as the requirement for signed drivers has also been dropped, but Microsoft is clearly using the OS as a way of previewing security features that make life difficult for programmers, but will benefit users in the long run.

Is Vista 64 Ready For Prime Time?

Ultimately, the decision will be up to you. Some compatibility sacrifices may need to be made, but the price of transitioning to 64-bit Vista today is much less painful then it was a year ago. It probably isn’t a good solution for casual users who only want to surf the web and watch Youtube on 5 year old hardware. But it is the future of operating systems, and it is finally stable enough to give a reliable user experience with most modern hardware. Microsoft has publically stated that Windows 7 will be the last 32-bit operating system, and if memory prices continue to crash, 32-bit Windows 7 may not even be a popular choice. OEM Vista 64-bit machines are also finally beginning to appear at retail, and within a few years it is not hard to image even mainstream users wanting 4GB of RAM or more. A new chapter in PC history is about to begin.

Useful Links

- Nvidia Graphics Card 64-Bit GeForce Drivers

- ATI Graphics Card 64-Bit Catalyst™ Drivers

- Creative Labs X-Fi 64-Bit Sound Card Drivers

- Microsoft 32/64-Bit Compatibility Center

- Microsoft On The Differences Between 32 & 64 Bit Versions Of Vista

- Order 64-Bit Media From Microsoft For Owners Of Vista 32-Bit